Smith And Wesson Forums banner

41 - 60 of 90 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
428 Posts
Okay, what he did may not have been illegal but it was stupid … very, very stupid.

It also brings up another interesting question. Does someone this stupid have the right to own a firearm? Should his gun(s) be confiscated and should he be banned from legally purchasing a firearm ever again? Under red flag laws I think you could make a case for doing so. Is stupidity and lack of judgement akin to mental instability?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
Okay, what he did may not have been illegal but it was stupid … very, very stupid.

It also brings up another interesting question. Does someone this stupid have the right to own a firearm? Should his gun(s) be confiscated and should he be banned from legally purchasing a firearm ever again? Under red flag laws I think you could make a case for doing so. Is stupidity and lack of judgement akin to mental instability?
You want firearms confiscated based on YOUR opinion of someone's IQ? I find that extremely offensive, and ignorant, turn them in to your local PD ASAP.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,996 Posts
I can agree with part of your statement but you missed the point because “I” wasn’t there but John Q. Public was. What you call his attire isn’t the issue. Whether or not he was testing the open carry law or had nefarious intent, it would scare the crap out of those folks in light of the recent shootings. I question why, if he was “testing” would he need to pack 100 rounds of ammo and those banana magazines. Wouldn’t the rifle have been sufficient?
Understood. It's easy to misunderstand and talk past one another on discussion forums.

Cheers.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
5,996 Posts
Does someone this stupid have the right to own a firearm?
I'm sure Chuck Schumer would say no. That alone answers the question for me.

The kid made a poor decision. I think there's near universal agreement on that. But it's not like he got drunk and drove a car which results in over 10,000 fatalities each year. Now THAT's stupid.

He entered Walmart, walked the isles and departed the store. No one was hurt. He didn't point a gun at anyone nor otherwise behave in a threatening manner other than being in possession of a rifle and handgun, which unlike drunk driving isn't against the law.

Deep breath boys... let's not allow the media to whip us up into a prohibited persons frenzy.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,335 Posts
Discussion Starter #45
Sorry I started this thread maybe I should lock it. I don't want in fighting about what was basically a stupid thing to do (on the kid's part) and an illegal act on the part of the fireman....

Like Forrest Gump said in that famous movie... "Stupid is as stupid does'.

Lets all be civil like Phil so aptly posted.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
162 Posts
I for one am not twisted up by this post at all. I agree with some, and not others. I hope that most all of you grew up like I did, and are able to handle others disagreeing with you.

But you sure do get a glimpse into some personalities with the answers. :D

All good in my opinion.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,335 Posts
Discussion Starter #47
Not everyone will agree on everything. That is about being a human and being able to rationalize but no reason to be combative. It's a public forum after all and everyone's opinion is welcome. I may not agree with posts or threads. MY SOP on that is just don't comment.

I just don't want to see the kid labeled a felon because he had a stupid moment. However I do feel the off duty fireman exceeded his authority when he drew down on the kid. Just because of current events...gives you no right to point a weapon at anyone despite the circumstances. Now, if the kid was shooting up the store that is another matter but shouldering a rifle in a store that wasn't posted 'no firearms allowed' in an open carry state, might have been stupid (considering current events) but the fireman was flat out wrong in his actions and in my view, should be prosecuted for brandishing.

Like I said at the outset of the thread, Michigan is legal open carry and I do, just not down here in potential snowflake land because I don't want to be hassled by LE from some do-gooder calling them (they have to respond), it is, after all, their job and two, I don't think I'd enter any non posted store (especially a Walmart) with an AR on my shoulder. Not too swift in my view.

When I'm 'up north', I regularly wear iron into the store, Walmart included, but almost everyone does up there so it's accepted practice.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
1,974 Posts
While its legal in Lincoln, Nebraska to open carry in Walmart, I wouldn't do it because its not wise. Lincoln police when they get complaints would charge you with "disturbing the peace".
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,335 Posts
Discussion Starter #51
There are levels of STUPID that really should be a crime. This is one such example.
Not really, not everyone is an Einstein in this world. If they were, we'd be even more screwed up than we are now. Besides, who are you to judge what is a crime and what isn't anyway?

All distills down to common sense in a particular situation and it's obvious the kid lacked that. Was he stupid, probably not. Stupid and common sense are two different things. The off duty fireman didn't exhibit much in the way of common sense either in my opinion. Two peas in the same pod.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,491 Posts
According to one recently touted study 3% of the population own 50% of the firearms. Largely law abiding mature white males in the south and southwestern states etc. etc. People who believe they are largely responsible for their own safety and so on. That largely defines our membership. Seeing some of the fine collections posted, I am more than less prepared to accept the premise. We see this issue differently and yet we do not always agree.

What I am reading into some of the responses is an old common law premise: "The actions of a reasonable man". Another old adage is: the power of lawyers is in the ambiguity found in laws. I'll say it my way, "if you are doing what's right you generally do not have to concern yourself with whether or not its legal".

Or to borrow a John Wayne line, "Life is hard; its harder when you are stupid." We are in for some tough times in the gun world going forward. We can not afford beyond reason or stupid in our ranks. My two bits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
387 Posts
What that kid did, did not help us. Us being lawful gun owners but he is a kid. Truth be told, I did stupid things in my youth that I am happy y'all don't know about. That may have been his moment.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
33 Posts
The fireman was the ONLY person who broke the law, he pointed a gun at an innocent person who was not a danger to him or others. Glad the OCer did not shoot him, but he would have been justified in my opinion. I hope no wannabe hero points a gun at me just because I am OCing because the outcome will be treated as a threat to my life.

Honestly the danger to the second amendment comes from Fudds, not hoplophobes.
The OCer was an idiot. He did nothing but increase the public anxiety. Testing his right to open carry? Nope just being a blowhard. He got exactly the reaction he was hoping for. Assh***.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,335 Posts
Discussion Starter #56
The OCer was an idiot. He did nothing but increase the public anxiety. Testing his right to open carry? Nope just being a blowhard. He got exactly the reaction he was hoping for. Assh***.
Again I have to disagree with you comment. Been told by more than one poster on here that Missouri (where the incident occured) is an open carry state (just like Michigan, where I live is).


Consequently, while I will agree the act of carrying an AR style rifle on his shoulder was not too bright, if the Walmart wasn't posted 'No Firearms allowed on this property', then he was within his rights but the off duty fireman was wrong and like Walking wolf stated and I agree, if the kid was me and the fireman drew down on me, I'd consider that intent to kill (me) and I would act accordingly.

IOW, if given the chance I would have shot him, center mass and probably more than once. That is called stopping the threat and the fireman would be just that.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion but, keep in mid that the trip down the slippery slope is fraught with obstacles, some obvious and some discreet.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12,335 Posts
Discussion Starter #58
What does "off duty Fireman" have to do with it? If the guy was a plumber, would they say off duty plumber?
Good question. I suspect not because a fireman is considered a first responder while a plumber is not, unless the leak is in your 'necessary room'.... Irregardless, he had no legal right to draw down on the kid. Plain and simple.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
362 Posts
The OCer was an idiot. He did nothing but increase the public anxiety. Testing his right to open carry? Nope just being a blowhard. He got exactly the reaction he was hoping for. Assh***.
Nope, hoplophobes increase anxiety, unfortunately some are gun owners. Walmart when probed on the incident stated they follow the constitution, and where law allows customers are allowed to OC both handguns, and long guns. The OCer who was informed by the MOD who then pulled the alarm. Straight out of the training guide of Everytown Mad Mommies, he should be fired. If he was the manager on duty that the OCer contacted to ask permission then he should be charged as this would clearly be evil intent to get the OCer killed.

Walmart policy is not new, it has been for decades, there is no doubt the MOD(manager on duty) knew the policy, this IMO has leanings to a swatting by the MOD.
 
41 - 60 of 90 Posts
Top